ReviewGlobalization and health2019
Getting the most from after action reviews to improve global health security.
Review in Globalization and health, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
25 citing papers in PubMed.
- Strengthening Global Health Security in West Africa: Insights from Joint External Evaluations and After-Action Reviews.Dialogues in health · 2026Review
- Resurgence of malaria in Ethiopia: a national landscape analysis of systemic and operational gaps.Malaria journal · 2026Article
- Advancing crisis readiness through progressive simulation in undergraduate medical education.Advances in simulation (London, England) · 2026Article
- Governance, coordination, and accountability in public health emergency preparedness and response: A scoping review.PLOS global public health · 2026Article
- Novel Application of the After-Action Review Technique for Therapeutic Debriefing after Unscheduled Cesarean Births.AJP reports · 2026Article
- [Intra- and after-action reviews of public health emergencies: report of the Brazilian experience and achievements, 2023 to 2025Evaluación durante y después de una emergencia de salud pública: experiencia y avances de Brasil entre el 2023 y el 2025].Revista panamericana de salud publica = Pan American journal of public health · 2026Article
- Preparing to Respond to the Next Pandemic: Impact of Key WHO IPC COVID-19 Response Products.Public health challenges · 2025Article
- [Status, classification, and potential of implementation research: an inventory for public health in Germany].Bundesgesundheitsblatt, Gesundheitsforschung, Gesundheitsschutz · 2025Review
- Observational research in epidemic settings: a roadmap to reform.BMJ global health · 2025Article
- Rapid Adaptation to Prevent Drug Use (RAPD): protocol of a pilot randomized trial to enhance the impact of an evidence-based intervention for youth.Pilot and feasibility studies · 2025Article
- [An After-Action Review at Municipal Level in the Public Health Service - Lessons Learned at the Corona Unit of the Duesseldorf Public Health Authority after the end of the Covid-19 Pandemic, March 2023].Gesundheitswesen (Bundesverband der Arzte des Offentlichen Gesundheitsdienstes (Germany)) · 2024Article
- A conceptual learning analysis of paired after action and intra action reviews for health emergencies.Learning health systems · 2024Article
- How feasible or useful are timeliness metrics as a tool to optimise One Health outbreak responses?BMJ global health · 2024Article
- A Knowledge Management System for health emergencies: facilitating knowledge continuity and timely decision-making for frontline responders using experiential knowledge captured during action reviews.Frontiers in public health · 2024Article
- Assessing public health preparedness and response in the European Union- a review of regional simulation exercises and after action reviews.Globalization and health · 2023Review
- The European experience with testing and surveillance during the first phase of the COVID-19 pandemic.Globalization and health · 2023Article
- A methodological approach to intra-action reviews - application and adaptation of existing global guidance during the COVID-19 pandemic response in Ireland, 2021.Euro surveillance : bulletin Europeen sur les maladies transmissibles = European communicable disease bulletin · 2023Article
- After action review of the response to an outbreak of Lassa fever in Sierra Leone, 2019: Best practices and lessons learnt.PLoS neglected tropical diseases · 2022Article
- Applying after action review to examine residential treatment programs' responses to COVID-19.The International journal of health planning and management · 2022Article
- Advancing rapid adaptation for urgent public health crises: Using implementation science to facilitate effective and efficient responses.Frontiers in public health · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundAfter Action Reviews (AARs) provide a means to observe how well preparedness systems perform in real world conditions and can help to identify - and address - gaps in national and global public health emergency preparedness (PHEP) systems. WHO has recently published guidance for voluntary AARs. This analysis builds on this guidance by reviewing evidence on the effectiveness of AARs as tools for system improvement and by summarizing some key lessons about ensuring that AARs result in meaningful learning from experience.
resultsEmpirical evidence from a variety of fields suggests that AARs hold considerable promise as tools of system improvement for PHEP. Our review of the literature and practical experience demonstrates that AARs are most likely to result in meaningful learning if they focus on incidents that are selected for their learning value, involve an appropriately broad range of perspectives, are conducted with appropriate time for reflection, employ systems frameworks and rigorous tools such as facilitated lookbacks and root cause analysis, and strike a balance between attention to incident specifics vs. generalizable capacities and capabilities.
conclusionsEmploying these practices requires a PHEP system that facilitates the preparation of insightful AARs, and more generally rewards learning. The barriers to AARs fall into two categories: concerns about the cultural sensitivity and context, liability, the political response, and national security; and constraints on staff time and the lack of experience and the requisite analytical skills. Ensuring that AARs fulfill their promise as tools of system improvement will require ongoing investment and a change in mindset. The first step should be to clarify that the goal of AARs is organizational learning, not placing blame or punishing poor performance. Based on experience in other fields, the buy-in of agency and political leadership is critical in this regard. National public health systems also need support in the form of toolkits, guides, and training, as well as research on AAR methods. An AAR registry could support organizational improvement through careful post-event analysis of systems' own events, facilitate identification and sharing of best practices across jurisdictions, and enable cross-case analyses.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.